Promoting strong public schools for Providence\’s East Side and beyond

Post-meeting wrap-up

Just back from our meeting at King. We’ll recap later. For now, I’ll just say thanks to the 125+ people who came out on a cold night to support public education. Thanks also to Mayor Cicilline for talking about the City’s commitment to education and taking questions, and to Bill Bryant for showing us what new and renovated schools can look like. Also thanks to Denise Carpenter of PPSD, Stacey Jordan of the Mayor’s office, School Board member Jill Holloway, Councilmen Jackson, Wood and Yurdin, and Representative Ajello for attending. (Hope I didn’t miss anyone!)

Thanks most of all to my colleagues on the ESPEC steering committee for making this happen. What a great group to work with.

For now this post is here for you who attended to comment about any aspect of the meeting or the issues it raised. Lots of people filled out comment cards at the meeting, and we’ll post the comments, but here’s your chance to say what you forgot to say or thought of later. Ask the question you didn’t get to ask- we’ll get someone to answer. Take potshots. Whatever.

Click on “comments” below

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

11 Responses

I find it hard to believe, given all the questions and comments last night, and the 90+ readers of this blog today, that nobody has anything to say! I guess everyone is really shy!
The recap is coming, really, but we’ve been hard at work getting the survey out.

New construction would cost $23 million. Period.
Renovation would cost $35 million plus $2 million to build gymnasium addition
for a total of $37 million. Of that, Gilbane estimates that $8 million is properly allocated to the third floor.

It is impossible to comply with Code without doing the third floor, but the third floor
is not for a school. Therefore, the State will not pay for it. This means that the
State might say it will fund 80% of the $29 million, and leave it to the City to fund
100% of the $8 million.

Alternatively, it is possible that the State will not agree
even to fund the $29 million, as there is no good justification for funding a $29 million
renovation when you can have as useful a school for $23 million.

It does seem that, from an economics standpoint, our best chance of a new Bishop is a new building.

Does anyone know if it’s possible to see (online?) how the powers that be determined that new construction will cost 23 million and renovation will cost 37 million? I’d like to know, for instance, what major things need to be done to NB and where the ‘breaking point’ is on new vs. renovation.

also, I noticed that demolition ,etc seems not be included in the cost of ‘new’ so how much more will that cost?

I’m all for keeping the facade at NB as it’s a nice looking building and fits well in the neighborhood. I’d say keep the facade, gut the interior if need be and build a larger courtyard (combine the two current courtyards into one large one) thereby keeping the overall footprint of the school. Also, historic tax credits could possibly be applied in this case.

Bill, Sorry I haven’t responded sooner, but I am trying to come up with better fugures for you. We don’t have the detailed figures that produced the estimates. You are right that demolition is not included in the costs of new construction. On the other hand, there are costs not included in the renovation figure as well (asbestos abatement and others). Nor do I know who tax credits will work. We’ll find out what we can and report it,.

It is my understanding that the construction estimates were generated primarily by using a uniform figure for cost per square foot and multiplying it by the number of square feet. In the case of Nathan Bishop, the new construction would involve around 96,000 square feet, while renovation would require around 110,000 square feet, due to the configuration of the interior of the building. The entire building contains approximately 165,000 square feet, and the $37 million figure consists of renovating the entire building plus $2 million for new construction of an adjoining gymnasium. The net figure for renovating the first two floors of Nathan Bishop is closer to $27 million. These figures include some associated costs (such as the cost of demolition of the current building to make way for new construction) but not others; for example, if the renovation of the current building results in excessive asbestos abatement costs, then the figure would have to be revised upwards. Similarly, the renovation plan calls for the basic interior architecture to remain the same. If instead there is a desire to gut the building completely, this also could raise the cost above $37 million. For example, the February 7 community meeting at the King elementary school included a description of a K-8 school outside New Haven that resembles Nathan Bishop. The restoration project for that building was $45 million.

On another note, the City of Providence School Department does not pay taxes, so it would not be eligible for historic preservation tax credits. I do not know whether it could sell the credits to a taxable entity.